JD Saved by Grace wrote: Lung cancer diagnosis does not merit a medal. I also have listened to many of his shows. I once had to do a lot of traveling within my state as well as out of state and his radii broadcast was one show that I frequently listen to in my travels. Much of his show was very racially charged. I have nothing against him but I canâ€™t praise him either. I am, however, sorry he has Stage III lung cancer. Having worked in Oncology I know what lung cancer can do, and the stage he has been diagnosed is usually fatal and the different treatments are very hard on the patient. And being a racist is not an unpardonable sin.
I guess Limbaugh being a racist is why his screen caller for years has been a black man.
Douglas Fir wrote: --- They have been showing a new hospital built in record time, but they don't have the staff for it. Maybe the doctors have not been too eager to work there. It could be an opportunity for Christians to 'step up to the plate' (baseball season starts next month!) and the Chinese would be happy to have them die off to ensure the continuance of their Glorious Revolution, so what would the benefit be? ---
Don't know if you saw it, but the new hospital appears to have bars on the windows.
John UK wrote: Mike, it is not like you to make such a grievous error. You claim the Fall of man only affects man? Bro, it is far bigger than that.
"The scenario where God could destroy all and it would be just is not in the realm of possibility anyway. Contrary to his nature."
Are you serious?
I was responding to this, John:
"The sin of Adam brings death in all men, whether they be babies, young people, or adults. And because we sinned in Adam, this justice is perfectly just and fair. And God does not have to be gracious to anyone; all could die and God would still be just. I know Mike, we've sung this song before, eh?"
You brought up sin's effect on man, not all creation, bro. Of course it is bigger than that, but you were not talking about bigger than that, but about the effect on man, right?
If there will always have a remnant, if he declared his creation very good, then destroying all men made in his image would be saying he made a mistake. He makes no mistakes, therefore no potential for doing so exists, and therefore not within the realm of possibility. It seems an insult to him for man to speculate on what God could do when it is clear there is no scenario where he would.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Pre-ripped speechâť— https://tinyurl.com/wtn3kjg (Donald Trump and his Democratic opponents are grappling with life after impeachment) He was impeached, Timothy, what part of that you don't understandâť“
Impeach basically means accuse. That is the job of the House of Reps. He was accused. Trial is by the Senate. He was acquitted. See how simple it is, Jim?
Dr. Tim wrote: He was acquitted, Jim. Found not guilty. What part of that donâ€™t you understand?
I would guess the part that said not guilty. Jim says he was guilty by his own mouth, but doesn't post the quotations to enlighten us. As in the actual phone conversation that got it going. Like most Democrat Democrats and "independent" Democrats, Jim feels just saying something makes it so.
I don't like Trump's hair. It's not presidential. Romney has presidential hair. If I was a Democrat, I would praise Romney for his independence. But it would really be about the hair.
John UK wrote: Mike, as you would expect, I will now say that the main issue which resolves all of these dilemmas is an understanding of federalism, original sin, total depravity, in other words the effect of The Fall. I see it as devastating; you see it as only partly devastating. And it is this that divides the Calvinist (for want of a better word) from the Arminist (for want of a better word). The sin of Adam brings death in all men, whether they be babies, young people, or adults. And because we sinned in Adam, this justice is perfectly just and fair. And God does not have to be gracious to anyone; all could die and God would still be just. I know Mike, we've sung this song before, eh?
We sure have, John. But unless our thinking goes to before a man is created, there is no hope of resolution . The Calvinist and the Arminian both are stuck in time, with their theories based on a man already in existence. The effect of the fall affects only the living, not those God has yet to create until they are created. Until life begins in the womb, there is no fall, death, federalism, depravity to be taken into account. The scenario where God could destroy all and it would be just is not in the realm of possibility anyway. Contrary to his nature.
John UK wrote: --- God's sovereignty never did take away man's responsibility; the two go together, and never must one be promoted alone. One thing I will mention, and that is that when praying for souls, I ask the Lord to save souls through my witness or preaching as though all depended on him. And while I am preaching I make it clear that the sinner is responsible for his response to God's message. It seems to me that this is the Bible way of evangelism. ---
I agree. Now we need to figure how it is a man or even a Steinem is responsible for being born in the first place if they never at some point receive the tools needed to turn about. A man born physically blind is not held responsible for it, right? We know that from Scripture. How can a man born spiritually blind any more responsible? God was glorified when Jesus restored the man's sight. Had he passed him by, the man would remain blind, but he would still not be held responsible.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Cute quote : 'One journalist remarked to me, â€śHow in the world can these senators walk around here upright when they have no backbone?â€ť' https://tinyurl.com/sqtxkxu (In Private, Republicans Admit They Acquitted Trump Out of Fear)
If some Repubs voted for acquittal out of fear, it was fear of losing their next election. That is a healthy fear. Politicians aren't sent to Washington to do their own will. Most did not vote out of fear regardless of what a so called journalist said. We'll see how the people vote in November. It will be lovely. Nancy has seen to it.
John UK wrote: --- God is not weak or incapable of saving rebels, Mike. He can turn them around, he can give them spiritual life, he can motivate their will to desire to drink from the waters of eternal life, he can make them his children by adoption. Jesus said that God can make children for Abraham out of the stones at the side of the road. The "old man" that lives within us from birth, and remains within us when we become a "new man in Christ", is that part of us which rebels against God, particularly in respect to his sovereign will and purpose in the salvation of his elect.
As you say, John, the old man is with us from birth. Then we say, if Steinem is not turned around, it shall be just that she remain condemned. No problem. But it doesn't begin there. It begins not at birth, but when God created her in his image, a good. Before man was created, God said of his created things that they were good. It became "very good" after man was added to it, Gen 1:31. Can we say he created Steinem for no purpose other than to remain in her sin, for she cannot repent, for she has not been given the tools of repentance and faith, for such she has not been chosen? Is it not determinism, which is a philosophy, that leads to this thinking?
John UK wrote: "Pro-abortion, feminist stalwart Gloria Steinem has been relatively quiet in recent years." She's not long for this world, and certainly will not be "relatively quiet" in the lake of fire, where is weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. I would be happy for God to turn her around against her will, changing her will by his great grace which is irresistible, and bringing her into light away from the darkness which she has chosen. And he will do that, if he has chosen to do it. And he will not do that, if he has chosen not to do it. He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. Praise be to God!
Will you be just as happy for God to not turn her around, bro?
From the news: "People who read the news are more likely to feel angry towards Muslims, a new study has found."
Well, Duh. If they had no exposure to news, they would never know of the evil foisted upon the world by the false religion known as Islam. That there are peaceful Muslims has no bearing on the fact of evil religions, in this case, Islam.
Jim Lincoln wrote: https://tinyurl.com/s32tf3u (Adam Schiffâ€™s amazing Closing Argument) Of course, Adam made a play to the gallery, because the Senate wasn't going to pay any attention to the truth anyway, the majority of the Republicans. But, Adam made a pretty good play! ---
Schiff is a pathological liar. Now you approve of yet another sin. Do you think you'll ever take off your blinders, Jim?
Dems are negatives, not for anything, as they provide no constructive output. Angry, petulant, immature, incapable of thought, they only emote, nothing more. Any intelligent 7 year old has more maturity than any of the Dem candidates, except for Tulsi Gabbard, their only thinker that might have had a chance against Trump.